Pages

Thursday, 13 October 2016

All members
of UoL staff will be asked whether they wish to accept the proposals that the
University is proposing following negotiations with the employer around
information and consultation (ICE) arrangement for all employees of the
University. Your ICE reps worked hard to pull together proposals and put
forward arguments that meant we got the best deal for all UoL staff. UCU
and UNISON recommends that you support the proposal by voting YES.

We will be
able to act as a conduit for all members of staff who wish to be a part of the
information and consultation process. Would you like to know more about the
University’s financial situation? Would you like to see changes to the flexible
working policy? There will be regular open meetings as well as and an online
forum where all staff can submit questions and receive a response. We are
looking forward to our new role as an opportunity to continue to hold the
University to account and ensure that everyone can be involved in the process.

UCU and UNISON welcome the
opportunity to enhance our ability to represent all staff and are delighted
that the University has agreed to our proposals to set up an online forum and
hold regular open meetings with all staff.

If you are a
union member it obviously makes sense to vote YES, but if you are not,
here’s what UCU and UNSION has already done for you on your
behalf recently.

1. Increasing in London Weighting, which will be fully implemented by 2018 at
£3,500

2. Increasing in leave for L01-L06 from 25 and 27 days, with a further push to
make it equal for all staff in the future.

Our work on
the above issues have benefitted you, whether or not you are a member of the
union. It is true that members of the union do get more enhanced support from
the unions in the form of trained representatives, such as Angela, Sam and
myself - and get a say of the decision making process within the unions
locally, regionally and nationally.

However that
does not detract from the fact that we treat all members of staff equally when
discussing collective matters with the University. The new arrangements simply
formalise and facilitate our existing role.

Friday, 30 September 2016

Following close of consultation on 7 September, HEE management, after
negotiations with the Branch, provided their response to the
consultation included an amended set of proposals, yesterday, 29 September,
which we set out below.

Please note, these proposals are subject to certain
assumptions about VR rates which cannot be guaranteed (as VR applications are a
matter for individual employees, which they are free to withdraw should they so
wish) and therefore we cannot provide an absolute guarantee that provisions
below will take place. However, given the current number of VR applications
(75) and resignations (15), we are optimistic that we can achieve the following
key outcomes:

No compulsory redundancies will be made

No selection process will be required for the
vast majority of staff. Most staff will be slotted
into the new structure.

In addition the following provisions have been made:

The revised proposal will be subjected to an
externally conducted Equality Impact Assessment

Current part-time and flexible working
arrangements have been guaranteed

The timeline for implementation has been
extended until September 2017

Secondments will be reviewed and evaluated as
whether they can be considered as a ‘permanent’ positions for the purposes
of post-matching

Technology solutions will be subjected to
rigorous testing, and an evaluation of their capacity to provide
efficiency savings will be undertaken. This will take place prior to the
reduction in staffing which will be achieved through VR

A stakeholder engagement exercise will be
undertaken

Given the above, we believe that we have secured the majority of provisions
which we sought as part of our response to the consultation.

The exceptions to the ‘no selection’ provisions are likely to be staff
being considered for posts at Level 8a, who will be required to demonstrate
competency tests. We have secured assurance from senior management that
affected employees will be supported through training and development should
these not be met, and will be provided with in-job training and trailing. We
therefore believe that ultimately all those affected wishing to continue at
this level will be able to do so.

There is also a possibility that a very small handful of staff currently
employed between levels 5 and 7 may have to be subjected to a selection
process. This will be purely for the purposes of determining post allocation.
Ultimately we hope that this does not need to take place.

Finally we wanted to speak about VR. The current number of applications
is 75, which exceeds the numbers of WTE post reductions. This number is in
addition to a number of resignations and it will therefore not be possible for
the organisation to approve all of the applications that have been made.

We are aware that some members had queries surrounding their VR
applications following the HET bulletin which was circulated recently. To
clarify: if you have special extenuating circumstances pertinent to your VR
application which you have either not detailed on your application, or which
have arisen since you made your application, then you will be afforded an
opportunity to do this following the release of the management response to
consultation. You are welcome to do this immediately, if you so wish, by
contacting HR. If you would prefer it if we did this on your behalf then we are
happy to.

We believe that the undertakings that we have secured from senior
management provides an acceptable way forward that means that no-one will be
made compulsorily redundant and that most members will not be subjected to a
selection process. Our requests for additional measures around the timeline,
technology reviews, equality impact assessment and protection of part-time and
flexible working have also been incorporated.

The deadline for us to provide any additional comments to management is
next Thursday (6 October) and so we would welcome any thoughts that you
may have on this which we may be able to pass on.

We also understand that members may have queries about their individual
circumstances given the information we have provided in this
correspondence. We are, of course, more than happy to answer any such
questions you may have. Please email us on unison@london.ac.uk

Wednesday, 21 September 2016

Following the conclusion of negotiations in June 2016, the
University has announced an uplift of 2 days for grades 1-6s’ annual leave
allowance. This falls short of our original demand for 30 days parity across
all grades. Nonetheless, the offer was the best that could be achieved by
negotiation, and was
supported by members in our consultative ballot.

We reserve our right to revisit the issue in the future,
and have not abandoned our longer term goal of parity
between the grades.

UNISON’s HE pay ballot closed on 19 September and UNISON’s Higher Education Service Group Executive (HESGE) met on 20 September to consider the outcome. The ballot result was:

3,381 (54.9%) voted in favour of industrial action

2,782 (45.1%) voted against industrial action

After the meeting it issued the following statement:

“The HESGE took into account the close vote in the ballot, a disappointing turnout and the knowledge that it was likely that if UNISON did take strike action it would not be with all other unions (due to notable differences in positions and timetables). Joint union action has been key to previous successful action.

Taking this into account it was reluctantly agreed that UNISON would not take industrial action on this occasion. The HESGE felt that the ballot results and views from regions meant that the union could not deliver a sufficiently strong strike to force the employers to improve their derisory pay offer.

UNISON is committed to national pay bargaining and will continue to campaign to improve members pay, terms and conditions in higher education. Further discussions will take place at UNISON’s forthcoming HE branch seminar, which will also focus on the need to build membership and engage members in future industrial action ballots.”

We recognise that many members will be disappointed by this outcome given that the Branch voted by a clear majority in a consultative ballot to support industrial action. However, given the direction issued by the HESGE, we regret to say that we are not able to proceed to industrial action.

Tuesday, 13 September 2016

Consultation
on the proposed cuts and restructure within the Healthcare Education Team for
the London & South East Local Education and Training Board of Health
Education England (HEE) closed on 7 September 2016.

Prior to
this, UNISON Senate House Branch submitted a second response to the
consultation which you can read here.

The branch
is now entering a process of negotiations with senior management in which we
will be seeking the best possible deal for our members and will be seeking to
avoid the need to make staff compulsorily redundant. We will also be discussing
the timeline for the proposed changes and will be seeking to extend this for
the reasons outlined in our responses.

Wednesday, 7 September 2016

UNISON
members will be receiving their ballot paper to vote on whether to take
industrial action on the current pay offer over the next few days. The ballot
period runs from 30 August to 19 September 2016. The ballot helpline opens 5
September 2016 and the number is 0800 0857 857.

The
higher education service group executive is recommending members vote ‘YES’ for
strike action in response to the employer’s miserly 1.1% pay offer for the
majority of staff.

You
may be aware that last week the employers' produced an expanded 'draft offer'
ahead of UNISON’s industrial action ballot. This was published via the
employer’s website following a UCEA Board meeting. No discussion took place
with any of the trade unions ahead of the announcement.

However,
despite the sector facing the potential for escalating strike action in the
autumn the revised draft had very little change in the detail, and no movement
on the main sticking point: the 1.1% pay offer. It also appears that the
national employers ‎negotiating body (UCEA) has recommended to Universities
that they should implement the draft offer to staff, in effect imposing the
current offer, even before the outcome of industrial action ballots are known.

UNISON
sees this move as provocative and unnecessary given the employers stated
commitment to keep channels open for dialogue. As yet the employers have
made no attempt to approach the unions in dispute for further talks.

UNISON
members who will receive ballot papers in the coming days will see
through this attempt to influence the vote for in the industrial action on this
miserly offer. In fact, by imposing this offer it once more highlights
just how little the offer is worth for the majority of staff.

In
summary, the branch was profoundly disappointed by the lack of detail
surrounding the proposal which was provided as part of the consultation
paperwork. The branch has specifically highlighted the lack of detail around
proposed technological introduction as a means of labour-saving in addition to
concerns around matrix working. A number of other concerns were also raised, in
addition to a proposed alternative timetable.

We will be
responding to additional aspects of the proposals in due course.

Thursday, 28 July 2016

Members
working for Health Education England (HEE) on University of London contracts
will be aware that staff working in the PGMDE function (commonly referred to as
‘Operations’) are being consulted on proposals that, if introduced, would lead
to a 41% reduction in the number of posts. The branch is incredibly
disappointed that the proposal is very much a worst-case scenario in terms of
proposed reductions

Clearly
this is having a devastating effect on members employed in this department and
we want to encourage staff to contact us with any comments they have on the
consultation documentation (unison@london.ac.uk).
We will also be available to support members for any individual concerns or
needs that they might have, including representation for individual
consultation meetings.

The branch
is actively organising around a robust response to these measures and will be
regularly updating affected members. We remain resolutely opposed to compulsory
redundancies.

Thursday, 21 July 2016

Members are
now being sent invitations to respond to the consultation online. The
consultation will run for one week until 28 June 2016.

The branch
has now concluded negotiations with the University in relation to our claim,
which was for an uplift in annual leave for staff on CTS terms (grades 1 – 6)
in order to bring this in line with the allowance afforded to staff on AMP
terms (grades 7+).

The
University’s initial offer was to increase annual leave by two days, subject to
service. The branch rejected this offer on the grounds of equality. Higher
grades do not have to have earn additional leave based on service, therefore
neither should 1-6s.

Following
further negotiations, the University conceded an immediate uplift
(subject to agreement being reached prior to the end of July) from 25 days to 27
days for staff employed on grades 1-6 irrespective of service length.

Included in
this agreement is a clause accommodating a change in the way that annual leave
is calculated. Should members agree to this offer, leave will be calculated on
pro-rated basis according to each day worked (with leave allowances being
rounded up to the nearest half-day). Full details of the offer can be found here.

The
University have informed us that they are not willing to offer the full uplift
to 30 days due to financial considerations.

We are
disappointed that the University has not been able to meet our claim in full
but the Branch remains committed to the longer-term goal of equality in annual
leave provision across all grades. We wil revisit this matter with the
University in the future.

At this
present time, we believe that this offer is the best that can be
secured by negotiation. We believe that only a period of sustained
industrial action would potentially lead to an improvement in the offer.

Given the above, the branch is not making a
recommendation to either accept or reject the offer. We ask all members to
respond to the consultation.

Friday, 8 July 2016

As
affected members and staff will be aware, the University is proposing a
significant restructure at Student Central. If implemented this would involve a
significant reduction in staff in addition to the outsourcing of Student
Central’s front-of-house and bar/catering operations.

The branch
was profoundly disappointed that it was only notified of these changes one hour
before these were communicated to staff. We do not believe that the University
followed best practice in this regard.

Following
this announcement the branch submitted a responseto the University
challenging the proposed timetable. We subsequently submitted an additional responsechallenging many aspects of the proposed changes. We are still awaiting for
the University to respond to the points we have raised.

The branch
views the current proposals as short sighted and counter-productive to the
stated aim of achieving a balanced budget, and the branch remains opposed to
the outsourcing of services.

Friday, 11 March 2016

We are writing to you to express our members’ deep reservations
on the future direction of CoSector.

Since the change of management took place last year, we have
been broadly supportive of your efforts to restructure the business in order
for it to grow. We welcomed your apparent abandonment of the proposals to alter
terms and conditions for new and existing staff; and in return we accepted the
argument that the new senior management team would remain in place for the
purposes of growing CoSector’s business.

However, developments in the past week, which seem to be
widely known within all parts of CoSector, have cause great concern, not just
for those directly affected, but other members who now fear for their futures’
within the organisation.

To be clear, we refer to the proposed changes to TCG Central
Services team and Online Services team. If these proposals are implemented, it
will lead to the compulsory redundancy of four staff, with the implication that
future downsizing will occur once changes take place.

We were lead to believe that no redundancies would take
place in the short term and certainly not before the publication of the long
awaited business plan, which you have not provided to neither the Board of
Trustees nor unions as of this date. We
appreciate that these matters should not be rushed into and consequently we
strongly urge you to postpone these proposals for the time being.

You should note that UCU and UNISON have a policy of
opposing all compulsory redundancies and we oppose these proposals now. We will
be seeking to involve our respective national unions, via the London regional
offices.

We find it very unfortunate that many of the concerned
members believe that the faults of the business lie with the management that
was imposed last year. In particular, the high cost base that is being shared
amongst budgets, causing once surplus deriving teams to fall into a loss. As we have said, we recognise that in order
to grow and be successful CoSector needs good and effective management in
place. This is not necessarily cheap.
However, your latest round of proposals implies that the business is
trying to cut costs and downsize. This is not the strategy of a business trying
to grow. Members can see this quite clearly and are dismayed.

Thursday, 28 January 2016

Today (28 January 2016), UNISON – Senate House and EdExcel branch submitted the following claim to the University of London on behalf of University of London members working in grades 1 – 6.

UNISON Annual Leave Claim Bands 1-6 University of London

In line with clause 1.1 and 3.3 of the Recognition and Procedure Agreement between the University of London (“the central University) and UNISON we wish to table the following claim on behalf of all UNISON members employed in grades 1-6.

UNISON wish to open immediate negotiations with the University to secure parity across all grades in respect of annual leave entitlement as set out within the University Annual Leave Policy that currently facilitates for:

1.2 Employees on Academic or Administrative, Management and Professional (AMP) terms of conditions of employment with the Central University receive 6 weeks leave. Employees in other grades receive 5 weeks.

UNISON firmly believe that this policy contradicts one of the founding principles of the University namely equality “that remains a commitment today in respect of all staff employed by the University”

We further believe the current clause 1.2 brings into question clause 3.2 of the University Single Equality Scheme.

The Claim

All employees, regardless of grade, employed by the University of London will receive 6 weeks annual leave.

We seek to open negotiations around this claim as a matter of urgency and at your earliest opportunity and further seek to have the claim met in full and at no cost to our members.